just wondering if any of you know how to handle special characters with a website that contains a drop-down list. I scripted the following in Robot Framework (Selenium) to verify the contents of a drop-down list:
Verify all required fields and labels are present
Verify a and lists of b for 'ööö'
Verify a and lists of b for '${xyz}'
(...)
Dropdown "{abc}" should contain options "${json_blabla["ABC"]["${xyz}"]}"
However, when trying to do that, I get the following error message when running the script:
Resolving variable '${json_blabla["ABC"]["ööö"]}' failed: KeyError: '\xc3\xb6\xc3\xb6\xc3\xb6'
Any idea how to get around this? I'm sure I saved everything in UTF-8 encoding, and I think the JSON file should be fine too, so I'm suspecting it's somewhere in the script I just showed?
Found it:
It seems that it needs to be told explicitly that the string must be in Unicode, so one option to have it corrected is:
Dropdown "{abc}" should contain options "${json_blabla["ABC"][u"${xyz}"]}"
And voilà!
Thanks for voting & until next time!
Related
I'm kind of new to selenium IDE and automated test and I don't know much about programming languages. I have a question concerning verifyText command as verifyTextPresent is deprecated. If I put the target word/text in * * will it work as if I was using verifyTextPresent? Could waitForText work?
I am trying to verify that the search function of a website is working as expected. I search the word "client" and I want to verify that the word is present in the results.
clickAndWait css=div.cf-tooltip-text
type id=edit-global-search client
clickAndWait id=edit-submit-global-search
verifyText id=content-column *client*
This works, but in the Log I can not understand what it really does. Also if I try the word on its own "client" I get an error which I understand because it compares it to the text of the whole column. I also tried to put an irrelevant word between asterisks such as youwillnotfindthetext (just to make sure that everything between asterisks will pass the test) and there I had an error too.
So it seems to be working somehow but I want to ask some of you expert guys.
Thanks
If you put a * in starting and ending means it will look for the inner text containing in the specific element. If a text is present as you given in the script it will return a pass. If the text u specified in the script is not present, it will throw an error. That's what happens when you put youwillnotfindthetext in between the *.
Check this link Selenium: test if element contains some text
In my project Mockito.times(1) is often used when verifying mocks:
verify(mock, times(1)).call();
This is redundant since Mockito uses implicit times(1) for verify(Object), thus the following code does exactly what the code above does:
verify(mock).call();
So I'm going to write an a structural search drive inspection to report such cases (let's say, named something like Mockito.times(1) is redundant). As I'm not an expert in IntelliJ IDEA structural search, my first attempt was:
Mockito.times(1)
Obviously, this is not a good seach template because it ignores the call-site. Let's say, I find it useful for the following code and I would not like the inspection to trigger:
VerificationMode times = Mockito.times(1);
// ^ unwanted "Mockito.times(1) is redundant"
So now I would like to define the context where I would like the inspection to trigger. Now the inspection search template becomes:
Mockito.verify($mock$, Mockito.times(1))
Great! Now code like verify(mock, times(1)).call() is reported fine (if times was statically imported from org.mockito.Mockito). But there is also one thing. Mockito.times actually comes from its VerificationModeFactory class where such verification modes are grouped, so the following line is ignored by the inspection:
verify(mockSupplier, VerificationModeFactory.times(1)).get();
My another attempt to fix this one was something like:
Mockito.verify($mock$, $times$(1))
where:
$mock$ is still a default template variable;
$times$ is a variable with Text/regexp set to times, Whole words only and Value is read are set to true, and Expression type (regexp) is set to (Times|VerificationMode) -- at least this is the way I believed it should work.
Can't make it work. Why is Times also included to the regexp? This is the real implementation of *.times(int), so, ideally, the following line should be reported too:
verify(mockSupplier, new Times(1)).get();
Of course, I could create all three inspection templates, but is it possible to create such a template using single search template and what am I missing when configuring the $times$ variable?
(I'm using IntelliJ IDEA Community Edition 2016.1.1)
Try the following search query:
Mockito.verify($mock$, $Qualifier$.times(1))
With $Qualifier$ text/regexp VerificationModeFactory|Mockito and occurrences count 0,1 (to find it when statically imported also).
To also match new Times(1) you can use the following query:
Mockito.verify($mock$, $times$)
With $times$ text/regexp .*times\s*\(\s*1\s*\) and uncheck the Case sensitive checkbox.
I would like to be able to print in the logs a message for which intellij idea would present a nice way of comparing two objects (strings). This happens automatically for the error message logged by a failed junit assert:
assertEquals("some\nString", "another\nString");
=>
org.junit.ComparisonFailure: <Click to see difference>
at org.junit.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:123)
at org.junit.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:145)
at com.something.DummyTest.testDummy(DummyTest.java:89)
The <Click to see difference> entry is actually displayed as a link in the output window of the Intellij Idea. When you click on the link, a compare window opens which shows the two values (just like you would compare two files).
Simply throwing an exception is not acceptable because I would like to log multiple objects to compare. I already tried logging a text, but I wasn't able to convince idea to compare the two texts.
IntelliJ IDEA is using the hardcoded regular expression. If the text matches the pattern, it will suggest to click to view the difference.
The pattern is:
expected:<bla-blah> but was:<blah-blah-blah>
Output should match the format of assertEquals or assertThat.
The exact patterns are somewhat scattered around the code in IDEA, but some are e.g. here.
I had the same Problem and found the solution in https://github.com/joel-costigliola/assertj-core/issues/1364#issuecomment-440800958
You should throw an org.junit.ComparisonFailure. Then IntelliJ will display the <Click to see difference>
I'm doing something like the following: Validate number of nested attributes.
I'm checking for existence of at least one nested attribute.
This was working fine when I was using a text input for the date but I've changed it to use a date_select instead and now the same validation code shows an error saying that not enough have been chosen.
When it fails validation and reloads the form it also doesn't "build" an instance of the nested attribute either so it just shows my "[+]" link
Anybody got any ideas?
Failing everything I'll just have to put the text field back (probably using type=date).
Col
I decided to just put the text field back.
I'm a Selenium n00b... it's clear how easy it is to run a test and verify a particular response, but how can I take a value from one response and use it in the next test?
an example might be a contact creation form...
type in name/email and click submit
response arrives with new ContactID
grab the ContactID that was returned and put it into "get" textbox and click "submit"
response arrives with contact details
verfy the name/email match the first set
how might I go about doing this in Selenium?
And now something completely different:
Now I understand when you say "test", you mean a single assertion within one test case. So you want to use a value returned from a request as input for another request in the same test case.
Assuming you use selenium ide: To do this, use one of the "store..." commands in selenium ide and store the value into a variable. The contactID can be found using a matching selector with the storeText command. For example:
command: storeText
target: selector for element containing contactId
value: contactId
Then, use variable substitution and the type command to insert that text somewhere else.
command: type
target: selector for target input box
value: ${contactId}
Hope this helps :)
(This answer is still correct I think if you interpret "test" as "test case". For another, totally different answer see below.)
You don't do this. Each test should be independent from all other tests. For your second test, just repeat the steps in the first test. This way, you can reproduce test success and failures in a reliable way.
If you have many tests which all start from a certain application state which requires many steps to reach, just write a private helper method to reach that state.
The alternative: All steps you describe can be put into a single test. There is no reason not to have several asserts in one test.